Roman Reduplication Abstract - IGG41

Roman Reduplication Abstract
Dara Jokilehto, University of Geneva
Keywords: Syntax, Italian, Reduplication
This paper examines Roman Reduplication (henceforth RR), a phenomenon found in the
Roman variety of Italian and some other, central Italian dialects. The aim of the paper is to
describe the phenomenon and to provide a cartographic (Belletti 2004; Cinque 2002; Rizzi
2004) account of the same. RR is found in spoken Roman and is very rare in writing. The
phenomenon consists of a partial reduplication of the verbal projection, including negation (if
present) and clitics. The reduplication is partial, given that arguments (and other material)
occurring after the verb are never reduplicated. Below an example of RR (1) is given, along
with its Standard Italian counterpart (1).
(1) a.
b.
Roman
M’ hanno fregato ‘r motorino, m’ hanno fregato!
to.me have.3pl stolen the scooter to.me have.3pl stolen
‘They stole my scooter!’
Standard Italian
M’ hanno fregato il motorino (*m’ hanno fregato)!
to.me have.3pl stolen the scooter to.me have.3pl stolen
‘They stole my scooter!’
Unlike other cases of reduplication (Marantz 1982; Travis 1999), RR has no effect on the
semantics of the verb, but rather expresses surprise, anger or chagrin. In this respect, it
resembles echo questions, such as that in (2), which echoes the utterance in (2), expressing
amazement or dismay. Unlike English echo questions, however, RR requires no antecedent.
(2) a.
b.
John said [he’s leaving].
John said what?!
RR is also compatible with Clitic Left-Dislocation (3) and, marginally, with Clitic Right
Dislocation (3).
(3) a.
b.
Roman
Er motorino, me l’hanno
fregato, me l’hanno!
the scooter to.me it have.3pl stolen to.me it have.3pl
‘My scooter, they stole it!’
?Me l’hanno fregato, me l’hanno, er motorino!
to.me it have.3pl stolen to.me it have.3pl the scooter
‘They stole it, my scooter!’
There are further restrictions on what RR can target: the copied strings cannot be adjacent and
they must be identical. The latter condition means that not only clitics, but also the negation
must be faithfully reproduced. There are also conditions on what the targeted strings may
contain: complements, such as the direct object or a post-verbal subject, and adverbials cannot
be reproduced.
(4) a.
Roman
*Hanno fregato ‘r motorino a Pietro, hanno fregato ‘r motorino!
have.3pl stolen the scooter to Pietro have.3pl stolen the scooter
‘They stole Pietro’s scooter!’
b.
Me l’hanno proprio fregato, me l’hanno (*proprio)!
to.me it have.3pl really stolen to.me it have.3pl really
‘They really stole it!’
The possibility of combining RR with Focus Fronting shows that an overt Focus is not
required between the two strings for RR to take place (a focus is the element most typically
found between the RR strings). Some non-reduplicated element in this position is nonetheless
necessary.
(5) a.
Roman
Er motorinoi, me l’hanno fregato ti, me l’hanno!
the scooter to.me it have.3pl stolen
to.me it have.3pl
‘My scooter, they stole it!’
RR is compatible with declarative clauses, wh-questions, imperative clauses. The reduplicated
string may vary in length and can include verbal projections untensed embedded clauses, but
cannot commence from an embedded verbal projection. Minimally, RR requires the highest
auxiliary (or verb, if there is no auxiliary) to be targeted, along with the negation, when
present, and any clitics.
(6) a.
b.
Roman
Me vojjono frega’ ‘r motorino, me
vojjono (frega’)!
to.me want.3pl steal the scooter to.me want.3pl steal
‘They want to steal my scooter!’
*Pietro t’ha avvertito che te
vojjono frega’ ‘r motorino, te vojjono (frega’).
Pietro you has warned that to.you want.3pl steal the scooter to.you want.3pl steal
‘Pietro warned you that they want to steal your scooter.’
This paper maps the phenomenon using the cartographic framework, associating RR with a
position in the Left Periphery below the low Topic positions. Lastly, it discusses the bearing
this new data may have on open debates on the composition and ordering of the Left (and,
allegedly, the Right) Periphery.
References
Aboh, E. O., 2004. The Morphosyntax of Complement-Head Sequences: Clause Structure and
Word Order Patterns in Kwa. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Belletti, A., 2004. Structures and Beyond. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures. Volume
3. New York: Oxford University Press.
Cinque, G., 2002. Functional structure in DP and IP. The Cartography of Syntactic
Structures. Volume 1. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ghomeshi, J., Jackendoff, R., Rosen, N. & Russell, K., 2004. Contrastive focus reduplication
in English (the salad-salad paper). Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, Volume 22, pp.
307-357.
Marantz, A., 1982. Re reduplication. Linguistic Inquiry, Volume 13, pp. 435-482.
Rizzi, L., 2004. The Structure of IP and CP. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures. Volume
2. New York: Oxford University Press.
Travis, L. d., 2003. Reduplication feeds Syntax. Montréal, Université de Québec.

Download Report